The Economic Succession Doctrine in Private Enforcement of EU Competition Law: 'Nothing Extraordinary' After Skanska Industrial?
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2019 |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
Texto Completo: | https://doi.org/10.7559/mclawreview.2019.1828 |
Resumo: | The article analyses the recent judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) in Skanska Industrial. In its preliminary ruling, the CJEU recognised for the first time the so-called “economic succession doctrine” in damage claims concerning a breach of EU competition rules. In the judgment, the CJEU relied on its well-established case law. From this point of view, the ruling is “nothing extraordinary”. Nevertheless, the judgment represents an important milestone that contributes to the development of damage claims in Europe. The article first discusses the origins of the economic succession doctrine, which derives from the broad concept of “undertaking” developed by the CJEU case law and the so-called “single economic entity” doctrine. Afterwards, the article discusses the Skanska Industrial case, in particular by comparing the opinion of Advocate General (AG) Wahl with the CJEU ruling in the case. The article concludes by discussing the potential consequences of the CJEU ruling in Skanska Industrial on private enforcement of EU competition law, as well as the questions that remain open after the judgment. After Skanska Industrial, it remains unclear how the disclosure of evidence will take place in practice in the context of a damage claim following a corporate restructuring. Secondly, the limits of the economic succession doctrine remain unclear: it is unclear when a corporate restructuring indeed leads to the establishment of a “new” undertaking, free from the antitrust liability acquired by its predecessor. Finally, it remains unclear whether Skanska Industrial case law could also be extended to other remedies besides damage claims, such as actions requesting a court injunction, compensation for unjust enrichment, or a declaration that a contract is null and void. The article argues that in the coming years the CJEU will probably be called to clarify SkanskaIndustrial case law in order to answer these remaining questions. |
id |
RCAP_b18c9e27e3c7f1c00f01b9677461b0c8 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:ojs.revistas.ucp.pt:article/1828 |
network_acronym_str |
RCAP |
network_name_str |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
repository_id_str |
7160 |
spelling |
The Economic Succession Doctrine in Private Enforcement of EU Competition Law: 'Nothing Extraordinary' After Skanska Industrial?The article analyses the recent judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) in Skanska Industrial. In its preliminary ruling, the CJEU recognised for the first time the so-called “economic succession doctrine” in damage claims concerning a breach of EU competition rules. In the judgment, the CJEU relied on its well-established case law. From this point of view, the ruling is “nothing extraordinary”. Nevertheless, the judgment represents an important milestone that contributes to the development of damage claims in Europe. The article first discusses the origins of the economic succession doctrine, which derives from the broad concept of “undertaking” developed by the CJEU case law and the so-called “single economic entity” doctrine. Afterwards, the article discusses the Skanska Industrial case, in particular by comparing the opinion of Advocate General (AG) Wahl with the CJEU ruling in the case. The article concludes by discussing the potential consequences of the CJEU ruling in Skanska Industrial on private enforcement of EU competition law, as well as the questions that remain open after the judgment. After Skanska Industrial, it remains unclear how the disclosure of evidence will take place in practice in the context of a damage claim following a corporate restructuring. Secondly, the limits of the economic succession doctrine remain unclear: it is unclear when a corporate restructuring indeed leads to the establishment of a “new” undertaking, free from the antitrust liability acquired by its predecessor. Finally, it remains unclear whether Skanska Industrial case law could also be extended to other remedies besides damage claims, such as actions requesting a court injunction, compensation for unjust enrichment, or a declaration that a contract is null and void. The article argues that in the coming years the CJEU will probably be called to clarify SkanskaIndustrial case law in order to answer these remaining questions.Universidade Católica Editora2019-10-01T00:00:00Zinfo:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/otherinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttps://doi.org/10.7559/mclawreview.2019.1828oai:ojs.revistas.ucp.pt:article/1828Market and Competition Law Review; Vol 3 No 2 (2019); 171-186Market and Competition Law Review; v. 3 n. 2 (2019); 171-1862184-000810.7559/mclawreview.2019.3.2reponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãoinstacron:RCAAPenghttps://revistas.ucp.pt/index.php/mclawreview/article/view/1828https://doi.org/10.7559/mclawreview.2019.1828https://revistas.ucp.pt/index.php/mclawreview/article/view/1828/5658Copyright (c) 2019 Marco Bottahttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessBotta, Marco2022-09-23T15:10:26Zoai:ojs.revistas.ucp.pt:article/1828Portal AgregadorONGhttps://www.rcaap.pt/oai/openaireopendoar:71602024-03-19T16:03:41.673663Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãofalse |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
The Economic Succession Doctrine in Private Enforcement of EU Competition Law: 'Nothing Extraordinary' After Skanska Industrial? |
title |
The Economic Succession Doctrine in Private Enforcement of EU Competition Law: 'Nothing Extraordinary' After Skanska Industrial? |
spellingShingle |
The Economic Succession Doctrine in Private Enforcement of EU Competition Law: 'Nothing Extraordinary' After Skanska Industrial? Botta, Marco |
title_short |
The Economic Succession Doctrine in Private Enforcement of EU Competition Law: 'Nothing Extraordinary' After Skanska Industrial? |
title_full |
The Economic Succession Doctrine in Private Enforcement of EU Competition Law: 'Nothing Extraordinary' After Skanska Industrial? |
title_fullStr |
The Economic Succession Doctrine in Private Enforcement of EU Competition Law: 'Nothing Extraordinary' After Skanska Industrial? |
title_full_unstemmed |
The Economic Succession Doctrine in Private Enforcement of EU Competition Law: 'Nothing Extraordinary' After Skanska Industrial? |
title_sort |
The Economic Succession Doctrine in Private Enforcement of EU Competition Law: 'Nothing Extraordinary' After Skanska Industrial? |
author |
Botta, Marco |
author_facet |
Botta, Marco |
author_role |
author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Botta, Marco |
description |
The article analyses the recent judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) in Skanska Industrial. In its preliminary ruling, the CJEU recognised for the first time the so-called “economic succession doctrine” in damage claims concerning a breach of EU competition rules. In the judgment, the CJEU relied on its well-established case law. From this point of view, the ruling is “nothing extraordinary”. Nevertheless, the judgment represents an important milestone that contributes to the development of damage claims in Europe. The article first discusses the origins of the economic succession doctrine, which derives from the broad concept of “undertaking” developed by the CJEU case law and the so-called “single economic entity” doctrine. Afterwards, the article discusses the Skanska Industrial case, in particular by comparing the opinion of Advocate General (AG) Wahl with the CJEU ruling in the case. The article concludes by discussing the potential consequences of the CJEU ruling in Skanska Industrial on private enforcement of EU competition law, as well as the questions that remain open after the judgment. After Skanska Industrial, it remains unclear how the disclosure of evidence will take place in practice in the context of a damage claim following a corporate restructuring. Secondly, the limits of the economic succession doctrine remain unclear: it is unclear when a corporate restructuring indeed leads to the establishment of a “new” undertaking, free from the antitrust liability acquired by its predecessor. Finally, it remains unclear whether Skanska Industrial case law could also be extended to other remedies besides damage claims, such as actions requesting a court injunction, compensation for unjust enrichment, or a declaration that a contract is null and void. The article argues that in the coming years the CJEU will probably be called to clarify SkanskaIndustrial case law in order to answer these remaining questions. |
publishDate |
2019 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2019-10-01T00:00:00Z |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/other |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
https://doi.org/10.7559/mclawreview.2019.1828 oai:ojs.revistas.ucp.pt:article/1828 |
url |
https://doi.org/10.7559/mclawreview.2019.1828 |
identifier_str_mv |
oai:ojs.revistas.ucp.pt:article/1828 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
https://revistas.ucp.pt/index.php/mclawreview/article/view/1828 https://doi.org/10.7559/mclawreview.2019.1828 https://revistas.ucp.pt/index.php/mclawreview/article/view/1828/5658 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2019 Marco Botta http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
rights_invalid_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2019 Marco Botta http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Universidade Católica Editora |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Universidade Católica Editora |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Market and Competition Law Review; Vol 3 No 2 (2019); 171-186 Market and Competition Law Review; v. 3 n. 2 (2019); 171-186 2184-0008 10.7559/mclawreview.2019.3.2 reponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação instacron:RCAAP |
instname_str |
Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação |
instacron_str |
RCAAP |
institution |
RCAAP |
reponame_str |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
collection |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
|
_version_ |
1799130500096327680 |